abortion

Question 1

consequentialism

Answer 1

• must consider the consequences for all of those involved
  1. happiness and wellbeing for pregnant person and fetus? are the lives weighed equally?
  2. quality of life for all invovled: if continuing the pregnancy would lead to significant suffering, may be inclined to support abortion
  3. socioeconomic consequences
  4. womans autonomy: may allow that giving women autonomy over their own reproductive health contributes to overall well-being
• consequentialists could go either way on this, requires consideration of net happiness

Question 2

virtue ethics

Answer 2

• no clearcut answer, hursthouse walks through decision making
• there are some virtues that ought to be considered: focus on familiar biological facts (human parents tend to care passionately about their offspring, family relationships are among the strongest in our lives, human flourishing requires such relationships) and focus on salient facts (life is of great value, termination of pregnancy in some respects is cutting off human life)
• arriving at a virtuous choice will require a well-informed sense of what is worthwhile to do and me.
• this could entail motherhood, or not

Question 3

formula of humanity

Answer 3

1. requires consideration of pregnant person and fetus both as ends in themselves, recognizing their autonomy and intrinsic worth
2. avoiding exploiation, if a woman’s autonomy is respected and her decision is made without coercion than it may align with FOH
3. is dignity of all lives respected?
4. does life of the fetus have the same autonomy as the life of the fully formed fetus?
   - permissibility requires how you define a mere means, is society treating a woman as an incubator for an unwanted pregnancy treating her as a mere means? or is the choice to abortion a fetus (with the potential for humanity) treating it as a mere means to a child-free ends?
   - depends

Question 4

formula of universal law

Answer 4

• kant places a focus on autonomy and dignity, abortion is complex because it involves two beings
• cant universalize either option. under kants view it would sometimes be permissibile and othertimes not
• does universalizing abortion imply that potential life can be terminated at any point? doesn’t this contradict the obligation that we treat individuals with inherent worth and dignity?
• talk of viability